Ford - My Chequered History

Cranky car

We've disposed of our last Ford.

Over the years, we've owned (in sequence) two Falcon SRs, and two Focuses (Foci???).

All except for the Focus Trend illustrated have been reliable and good cars to drive. Not so this one, and this is the reason for unloading it. We've also signed up for the class action.

It has been off the road four times as a consequence of the completely unsatisfactory dual clutch auto. Ford calls it "Powershift". Others have coined a different moniker.

The last episode was a broken half shaft, no doubt as a consequence of the juddering that was a characteristic of the transmission during most of our ownership. This last episode, occurring as it did simultaneously with my bride's discharge from hospital after breast surgery was the last straw.

The local Ford dealer (no doubt as tired of these recurring episodes as the owners) was brilliant. They loaned us a Ford Escape for the duration of the repair, which took over a week. The repair didn't cost us, as I'd taken out an extended (5 year) warranty when we purchased the car in 2014. That turned out to be a very good decision.

We traded two vehicles (our Commodore ute and the cranky Focus) on a 2016 Kia Cerato hatch. It has the benefit of a seven year warranty, and because it's a hatch is both dog and bike friendly. If I need to shift stuff, I'll revert to ute hire.

The Replacement

Kia has come a long way in a short time on the Australian market, and they make very good cars as demonstrated by their rapidly improving market share.

Ford, on the other hand, are going backwards. It's a shame, as the small Fords were always fun cars to drive.

Virgin knows Any Publicity is Good Publicity

How they do it in the USA (Pic courtesy Daily Mail)

Picture it, gentle reader.

You're queueing to get on your Virgin flight.

You're surrounded by the usual crew - bearded hipsters, sweet young things wearing headphones secured to all manner of electronic trickery, grey haired boomers and noisy kids.

An announcement is made - impossible to decipher because the airport PA makes everything sound like the auditory equivalent of shrdlu, the printers devil.

As a result of this announcement, sundry passengers, a mix of fit looking young males, and decrepit appearing grey headed types, go to the front of the queue, and board first.

Once aboard, another announcement is squeezed between the safety briefing and a promotion for on-board refreshments. This announcement asks you to show respect for the people who were advanced to the front of the queue because they are "veterans".

You're not sure whether you should stand and applaud (difficult unless you're in an aisle seat), or simply nod appreciatively.

Sound dodgy?

Well that was what was suggested by the CEO of Virgin Airlines yesterday, with the apparent endorsement of the PM and Newscorp.

We hear that it is designed to show respect. Not for this "veteran". Embarrassment would be the likely outcome.

If my fellow travellers have to be asked to show me respect, I'd rather do without.

We hear it's all the go in the USA. Perhaps. After my visit there in July, I'd be reluctant to ape their practice. I saw too many veterans begging on the streets of NYC and Washington  to suggest their "respect" is anything more than lip service.

The term "veteran" has been in use in this country for a relatively short time. Like so many other chunks of our mother tongue, it is an American import. We used to be called "returned soldiers".

I am perhaps a little cynical, but I reckon it has more to do with marketing. After all, it doesn't offer any actual benefit (upgrades/reduced fare) and it costs both the corporate sector and the government nothing.

Our new PM was a marketing guru, after all. Every time I see him make an announcement, I'm always expecting to hear "But wait, there's more.....".

Michael Pascoe sums it up pretty well.

The postscript is particularly enlightening -

P.S. It is a curious thing that the military skews right, given that it was a Labor government that provided leadership through our most threatened hours and Liberal prime ministers who betrayed our servicemen by sending them to Vietnam and Iraq on lies.

Cuddle Carefully!

You won't find much mention of family matters on this blog, gentle reader, but with this post I'm making an exception.

Like 18000 Australian women annually, my bride of forty-one years was diagnosed with breast cancer a fortnight ago.

She has had two surgeries (the second one "insurance" according to the surgeon) and a treatment plan is being devised. The may involve all of (or none of) medication, radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

My bride has studiously followed the medical advice for years, having regular mammograms. Two of her sisters have had breast cancer, and one of them died as a consequence, so it's probably in the family. As we have two daughters, genetic counselling is recommended.

On the upside (if there is an upside to such a diagnosis) her lymph nodes are clear, so no spread is apparent. Also, the female radiographer who found the tumour was on the ball, as this particular cancer (LCIS) is notoriously hard to spot on the imagery.

Nevertheless, the uncertain path ahead is pretty scary. She is dealing with it using her own special brand of exasperation, stoicism and good humour.

Myself - probably not so well. I feel so bloody useless.

There are tremendous supports available these days, even in a regional centre like ours. There is no need to travel to the capital for specialist services, both diagnostic and treatment.

We (we're in this together) now embark down an uncertain, and frequently trodden road.

And after the surgery, we have to cuddle carefully.

Update: Surgery is done (including insertion of a porta Cath. Next is Chemotherapy  - weekly for three months.

Media Manipulation 101

We hear a great deal, gentle reader, about "fake news". A textbook example of this popped up yesterday on my Facebook feed.

As a Vietnam veteran I subscribe to a number of ex-service networks. On one of them, a report from the UK's Daily Telegraph, was posted claiming that students at Cambridge university in the UK had dishonoured veterans by voting against a student council motion that they should promote commemorations on the upcoming Remembrance day.

This report, predictably, generated howls of outrage from the veterans' community, and plenty were posted on the feed.

When I read it, it struck me that there was something a bit fishy about the story. I went on line to the local paper (Cambridge News) in an attempt to check it out.

What was reported there, was interesting, although you have to read way past the headline to get the full story.

The actual sequence of events was this -

1. The Cambridge University Conservative Association (CUCA) put a motion to the students' union council (CUSU) which read – “The council should encourage the commemoration of British war veterans on Remembrance Day across the University of Cambridge.

2. The Cambridge Defend Education group proposed an amended motion which read – “The council should encourage the commemoration of those whose lives have been affected by war across the University of Cambridge”.

3. There was a vote on both motions, and both were defeated.

4. CUCA responded on their Facebook page, writing: “CUSU Council shockingly voted against the motion that they should promote commemorations this Remembrance Day and encourage students to support the Poppy Appeal.”

5. The Daily Telegraph got hold of the story from the CUCA Facebook page and wrote their report, neglecting to mention that two motions were put up and both voted down.

What really happened was the Daily Telegraph created outrage for clickbait.

You can’t read the story until you subscribe to the paper’s website.

Try it

Donald Trump would probably describe the Tele's report as “Fake News”.

The whole thing was a stunt generated by the Cambridge University's Conservative Association.

I'd be very surprised if the bulk of Cambridge students had strong feelings one way or another about Remembrance Day.

A Blow-In

For years I've been intrigued by the various iterations of the Mazda MX5. Owning a couple of them has not resolved this fascination. 

Back in the early part of this century, two turbocharged versions of the NB were produced. 

The first (called SP) was a Mazda Australia project carried out under the supervision of Allan Horsley, but it was built by Prodrive in Melbourne, the company that builds FPV performance Fords in partnership with Ford.

The second (called SE) was an official Mazda factory version, called Mazdaspeed Miata in the US, and Roadster in Japan and other markets.

Both were relatively mild with low boost turbos, but the SP was a little more potent.

SP has decal

They were actually quite different cars. The SP is raw and comparatively rare, only 100 being produced. The SE is more thoroughly and conservatively engineered, but has up rated steering and suspension, which makes it a bit harsh around town, but a treat on the open road.

SE has badge

A couple of weeks ago I came across a 2004 SE advertised in Newcastle. Coincidentally, I was planning a visit to an old army mate in Newcastle, so combined that with an inspection of the SE.

The car was good, sporting a unique interior fitout. It pretty much sold itself.

Jasper Conran Interior

I flew to Newcastle from Brisbane, and was met at the airport by the obliging owner. Incidentally, the last time I flew Brisbane-Newcastle was on my way to Nasho at Singleton in January 1969.

This trip had a much more enjoyable outcome.

I drove the SE to Tamworth the same day, and drove Tamworth-Toowoomba the day after.

Whilst the boost is mild, it comes into its own overtaking on two lane roads. The Tamworth-Toowoomba stretch has plenty of stretches of great give and take roads.

Can't drive them both at once.

So now I have two MX5s. Given that I haven’t mastered the art of driving them both at once, the original is on the market.

Update - Original (left) is sold. It took a whole week!

Ground Hog Day?

Pic courtesy Fraser Coast Chronicle

I’ve blogged before about history rhyming, rather than repeating itself.

Having said that, for those of us more senior than most, the current divisions within the Liberal Party look to me like something we’ve seen before.

That something was the Labor split of 1955. I remember listening to my father discussing the issue with an old mate of his in preparation for the ANZAC Day dawn service in Koumala, so it must have come to a head in April, but can’t be sure of the year.

 Dad was pretty worked up – that I remember vividly.

 Perhaps it was around the time of Vince Gair’s expulsion, as I was 10 years old, and had some idea of what was going on. In 1955 at age 8, I don’t think I would have had much of a clue. He was kicked out of the party on ANZAC eve 1957, so that’s probably what I remember.

To be honest, I’m not sure whether the situation referred to the Victorian or Queensland split.

Back then, there was a militant anti-communist faction operating predominantly in the party’s Victorian branch.

These people had a very clear idea of what they were against. They were also heavily influenced by B A Santamaria. By the time the split had worked its destructive course through the various state branches of the party, and led to the creation of the DLP, so much damage had been done to the Labor movement that it took until 1972 for it to recover.

These days, there’s a faction within the Liberal Party which is noteworthy for what its members oppose. They were identified starkly by their holdout in the same sex marriage debate. Prominent amongst this group is an ex-prime minister who was heavily influenced by B A Santamaria.

They are notable for their apparent incapacity to negotiate or compromise.

 The depth of loathing that the protagonists within the Liberal party are showing right now, is eerily reminiscent of the Labor split. There doesn’t seem to be any room for negotiation or compromise.

 I reckon there’s a pretty good chance of a split. Watch this space….

Corruption Rewound

Pic courtesy News.com

A very long time ago, when I was a young teacher working with students with intellectual impairments, I came across a situation which, to put it mildly, made my blood boil.

There was a corner shop not to far from the school in which I worked, which had the habit of failing to give these kids change, when they bought low value items with large denomination notes.

It happened too often to be accidental, and after a number of complaints from parents, I took it on myself to have a chat with the shopkeeper. Initially, he denied ripping off these students, but when I recounted a couple of complaints, he became angry, called me a "bleeding heart", and threatened physical violence.

The message went out (discretely) and none of the students from the school darkened his door again.

That was back in the early eighties.

At the banking royal commission today, the father of a lad with Down Syndrome revealed how his son had been ripped off by a bank selling life insurance.

Vulnerable people are still being exploited in 2018.

Only these days, it not a spiv who runs a corner store in the frame, but a previously respected institution.

I don't believe things have improved much in the intervening thirty years.